Council rejects Police Commission slate, advances higher nuisance fines

The meeting opened by marking Love Life Week and the city's official motto, Love Life, adopted in 2016 in memory of a 16-year-old killed by gunfire in 1997. A councilmember read the Love Life acknowledgment, the girl's father spoke on the anniversary of her death about the foundation he started, and a performer gave a call-and-response performance. The Love Life Week resolution itself (item 6.10) was adopted later on consent. 00:05:00

• A councilmember announced the council would acknowledge the city motto with a Love Life anthem, a performance and remarks from the foundation's founder 00:05:00
• A councilmember said she was bringing legislation recognizing October 19 through 25 as Love Life Week in Oakland 00:05:56
• A councilmember read the Love Life acknowledgment, which commits participants to lead with love and denounce violence 00:07:59
• An invited speaker said the day was the anniversary of his daughter's killing and that the foundation in her name is mostly volunteer-run 00:11:08
• An invited speaker cited an impact report saying the foundation has reached 30,000 young people in twenty-nine years and asked for ongoing support 00:13:12
• A councilmember urged that the meeting keep to the acknowledgment's call for inspiration instead of insults 00:19:17

Procedural changes to the agenda. The clerk said the newspaper had not published required notices, so final passage of three ordinances on consent (6.5, the S-8/SB 79 zoning amendments; 6.6, salary ordinance title changes; and 6.7, solid waste rules) would be continued to November 10. The council president moved the Police Commission slate (5.2) to the top of the agenda. 00:20:16

• The city clerk asked that items 6.5, 6.6 and 6.7 be continued because the newspaper did not publish the city's notices 00:20:16
• A councilmember moved the Police Commission selection panel item to the top of the agenda, ahead of the public hearings 00:21:30

The Police Commission selection panel sent the council a slate of two nominees for the Oakland Police Commission, one of them a former mayor. Under the city charter the council can only accept or reject a slate as a whole. If it does neither within sixty days, the slate counts as accepted. Staff said that the day before, the second nominee had withdrawn because his law firm represents parties suing the city, and then asked to take the withdrawal back. City code bars attorneys who represent anyone with a pending claim against the police department from serving. On the city attorney's advice, the council rejected the slate so the panel can send a new one. The city attorney's office said its advice was not a judgment on either nominee's qualifications. 00:22:15

▶ Hear it Why can't the council vote on just one nominee? · 0:51

• Motion to adopt the second resolution, rejecting the selection panel's slate of two Police Commission nominees; the clerk attributed it to Kevin Jenkins (Councilmember, District 6; President, City Council; Chair, Rules and Legislation Committee), seconded by Rowena Brown (Councilmember, At Large; Chair, Community and Economic Development Committee; Chair, Education Partnership Committee). Result: passed, 8-0. 01:09:11

• City staff reported for staff that one nominee withdrew because his law firm represents parties suing the city, later asked to rescind the withdrawal, and that staff had no recommendation 00:22:56
• An official explained that under the charter the council must accept or reject the entire slate, and a slate not acted on within sixty days is deemed accepted 00:24:38
• A councilmember asked why the council could not vote on a slate of just one person 00:25:09
• A councilmember asked whether the law could be changed so nominees are taken one at a time 00:26:07
• An official said the slate requirement is in the charter, so changing it would take a charter amendment 00:26:45
• A councilmember said she hoped the former-mayor nominee would still be on the slate that comes back 00:27:12
• A councilmember said one candidate withdrew after questions from a news outlet and that rejecting the slate had nothing to do with either candidate 00:27:25
• An official clarified that the attorney's office was not saying either candidate was or wasn't qualified, and that rejecting the slate simply resets the process 00:27:53
• A councilmember asked whether the selection panel had alternates ready, and the answer was that it has a reserve pool 00:29:44
• An invited speaker said, as the former-mayor nominee, that the mayor asked her to serve on the commission at a critical time for the city 00:49:26
• An invited speaker said she will never run for office again and so cannot be pressured by the police officers union 00:51:28
• An invited speaker said she supported the commission's work this year on an immigration policy and on a drone policy 00:54:38
• Ken Houston (Councilmember, District 7) pressed the nominee on the commission's revised vehicle pursuit policy, which he tied to smash-and-grab crime in his district 00:55:37
• An invited speaker said she wanted to see data before taking a strong position on the pursuit policy change 00:56:37
• An invited speaker said she would push to change the pursuit policy if data showed it harmed the community, and stressed officer training 01:07:16
• Charlene Wang (Councilmember, District 2; Chair, Public Safety Committee) praised the nominee's past work on Ceasefire and sex trafficking and said the commission needs AAPI representation 01:00:48
• Charlene Wang (Councilmember, District 2; Chair, Public Safety Committee) said she will support the former mayor's appointment 01:04:42
• A councilmember asked colleagues to save detailed questioning for when the slate returns and to move the agenda 01:05:48
• Ken Houston (Councilmember, District 7) said it took about a year and a half, and a letter from the governor, for the commission to revise the pursuit policy 01:08:40

A state-required public hearing on a city subsidy of more than $100,000. The city agreed to give Oakland Roots and Soul Soccer Club up to $300,000 of extra hotel tax (transient occupancy tax) collected in June 2026 above the June 2025 baseline of $1,360,000, if the club brought a World Cup team's base camp to Oakland. Staff reported that the club met every target: Australia's national team used the club's facility and stayed at the Claremont Hotel. June 2026 hotel tax came to about $1.7 million. The city kept the baseline, the club got $300,000, and the city kept about $80,000 more. This was a report only. The council received it. 01:09:11

• Motion by Noel Gallo (Councilmember, District 5; President Pro Tempore), seconded by Rowena Brown (Councilmember, At Large; Chair, Community and Economic Development Committee; Chair, Education Partnership Committee), to open the public hearing. Result: passed, 8-0. 01:10:03
• Motion by Rowena Brown (Councilmember, At Large; Chair, Community and Economic Development Committee; Chair, Education Partnership Committee), seconded by Janani Ramachandran (Councilmember, District 4; Chair, Finance and Management Committee), to close the public hearing and receive and file the report. Result: passed, 8-0. 01:28:09

• City staff reported the club met all performance targets, bringing Australia's team to its facility and hosting watch parties and local events 01:12:53
• City staff said the city collected about $1.7 million in hotel tax in June 2026 01:14:02
• City staff said the club received the $300,000 and the city kept about $80,000 above that 01:15:04
• City staff noted hotel tax rose 28% even with five fewer hotels and 360 fewer rooms than a year earlier 01:15:04
• City staff said the Claremont Hotel has a Berkeley address but all of its hotel tax goes to Oakland 01:15:04
• City staff said the hearing is required by state law for economic development subsidies and that no action was needed 01:16:06
• A councilmember said most of the Claremont Hotel's property is in Oakland and its hotel tax goes to the city 01:17:27
• A councilmember urged staff to study Miami's stadium-centered development as a model for the Coliseum and sports development 01:18:16
• Ken Houston (Councilmember, District 7) asked why the team stayed at the Claremont rather than in Districts 6 and 7, where it played 01:20:30

An ordinance from Zac Unger (Councilmember, District 1; Chair, Public Works and Transportation Committee) amending Municipal Code chapter 1.08 to raise the maximum civil penalty for nuisances. Per the agenda, the cap would be up to $2,500 a day for repeated or continuing violations and up to $10,000 a day for nuisances on real property left unabated after notice and a chance to fix them. The sponsor said the $1,000-a-day cap dates to 1968 and that some repeat offenders treat it as a cost of doing business. City attorney staff said the cap is a ceiling: the city administrator sets a schedule of fines under it, and it applies to every department that enforces nuisance rules. The council approved it on first reading. Final passage is set for November 10. 01:28:09

▶ Hear it Will higher nuisance fines matter if no one collects them? · 0:44

• Motion by Zac Unger (Councilmember, District 1; Chair, Public Works and Transportation Committee), seconded by Rowena Brown (Councilmember, At Large; Chair, Community and Economic Development Committee; Chair, Education Partnership Committee), to open the public hearing. Result: passed, 8-0. 01:28:47
• Motion by Zac Unger (Councilmember, District 1; Chair, Public Works and Transportation Committee), seconded by Charlene Wang (Councilmember, District 2; Chair, Public Safety Committee), to close the public hearing and approve the ordinance on introduction (first reading). Result: passed, 8-0. 01:55:02

• A councilmember said the city's maximum penalty of $1,000 a day was set in 1968 and no longer deters the worst offenders 01:29:52
• A councilmember said the ordinance raises the cap from $1,000 to $10,000 a day, aimed at chronic offenders such as owners of rotting buildings and unpermitted builders 01:29:52
• A councilmember said the ordinance still lets people fix problems in good faith, with escalating fines before the maximum 01:30:55
• A councilmember said the goal is compliance, not revenue 01:30:55
• Ken Houston (Councilmember, District 7) said he signed Measure RR, which he said changed the 1968 law, and has fought illegal dumping for years 01:32:14
• Ken Houston (Councilmember, District 7) said illegal dumpers should face jail, not just fines, and asked for trained staff to gather evidence for the district attorney 01:33:17
• Charlene Wang (Councilmember, District 2; Chair, Public Safety Committee) asked whether the ordinance only sets an overall cap, and was told it raises the ceiling for anything now capped at $1,000 01:34:50
• A councilmember questioned who will enforce and collect higher fines when current fines are not enforced 01:36:00
• A councilmember said code enforcement imposes the fines, is short-staffed, and he wants more officers in the next budget 01:37:29
• A councilmember said the cap was raised to $5,000 in 2020 and that did not stop dumping 01:38:53
• A councilmember asked whether automatic inflation adjustments could legally be built into civil penalties 01:42:12
• An official explained for the City Attorney's Office that the city administrator sets a schedule of fines under the $10,000 maximum, and that it applies to all departments that enforce nuisance rules 01:42:54
• A councilmember added that higher fines make it easier for the city to put liens on properties 01:44:22
• An official advised that adding enforcement-staff requirements was outside the scope of the item as noticed and would need a separate item 01:53:36

A resolution confirming Barbara Lee (Mayor)'s appointment of a land-use attorney and former Planning Commission chair to the City Planning Commission. The mayor's office said he has more than thirty-five years of legal experience. The appointee told the council he would push to streamline planning, said displacement is something the commission can weigh in on even though it isn't its main job, and pointed to the general plan update expected next spring. The council confirmed him. 01:55:02

• Motion by Noel Gallo (Councilmember, District 5; President Pro Tempore), seconded by Zac Unger (Councilmember, District 1; Chair, Public Works and Transportation Committee), to adopt the resolution confirming the appointment. Result: passed, 7-0, 1 excused. 02:09:01

• City staff presented the appointment for the mayor's office, citing the appointee's prior service as commission chair and his legal and land use experience 01:55:37
• A Planning Commission appointee said today's planning challenges, such as economic development and work with the port, differ from those of the 1990s 01:56:46
• A Planning Commission appointee said the commission can play a role in discussing displacement even though it is not the commission's primary jurisdiction 01:57:43
• Ken Houston (Councilmember, District 7) asked how the planning process could be streamlined, citing a constituent who lost loans to delays 01:58:32
• A Planning Commission appointee said well-intentioned laws have become procedural traps, and the commission can push staff to bring matters forward faster 01:59:22
• A Planning Commission appointee said long-range planning will be part of the general plan update coming next spring 02:00:21
• A councilmember asked the appointee to be a strong advocate for more housing, citing rising rents 02:01:22
• A Planning Commission appointee pointed to inclusionary zoning and zoning bonuses as ways to add housing, including affordable housing 02:01:41
• Ken Houston (Councilmember, District 7) corrected his earlier remark, saying the Claremont Hotel is listed in Berkeley but part of its parking lot is on an Oakland parcel 02:07:53

The city auditor's audit of how Public Works and the Department of Transportation manage money for capital projects such as roads, parks and buildings, covering fiscal years 2023 through 2025, when the city spent about $300 million on them. The audit found the construction management manual hasn't been formally adopted and doesn't match practice. It found change orders and orders to proceed often lacked the required approvals, some cost increases went ahead without council approval, staff vacancies were high, there is no central project-tracking system, oversight of Measure KK and Measure U bond funds was weak, and the city has had no long-term capital plan since fiscal 2023. The council received the report. 02:09:13

▶ Hear it Were there consequences when projects overspent? · 0:55

• Motion by Ken Houston (Councilmember, District 7), seconded by Noel Gallo (Councilmember, District 5; President Pro Tempore), to receive and file the audit report. Result: passed, 8-0. 02:56:28

• The city auditor's office said the city spent about $300 million on capital projects over three years, with Measure KK the largest single source 02:12:37
• The city auditor's office said change orders took far longer than the manual's two-week standard, and that neither department has adopted the manual 02:13:38
• The city auditor's office said 41% of contracted capital spending went through on-call contracts, which the city has no general guidance on 02:17:13
• The city auditor's office said on-call contracts were extended an average of two years, the longest by four years 02:17:13
• The city auditor's office reported that more than half of sampled orders to proceed did not follow requirements 02:18:34
• The city auditor's office said about half of construction management civil engineer positions were vacant, which slowed paving and street repair 02:19:44
• The city auditor's office found inadequate oversight of bond funds, including payments charged to the wrong funds 02:22:58
• The city auditor's office said the required annual audits of bond fund use have not been done 02:22:58
• The city auditor's office said bidding out projects before designs were finished led to avoidable change orders 02:23:59
• The city auditor's office said the city has had no multiyear capital plan since fiscal 2023 and recommended one, plus annual progress reports to council 02:25:00
• A councilmember pointed out conflicting implementation dates for the on-call contract recommendations in the city's response 02:28:44
• City staff said the November 2026 date was overly ambitious and January 2027 is the accurate target 02:29:56
• Charlene Wang (Councilmember, District 2; Chair, Public Safety Committee) called alarming the audit's finding that one on-call task order reached $8.4 million, against a $730,000 limit in San Jose 02:30:20
• The city auditor's office explained that qualifications-based selection has firms compete on experience and expertise rather than lowest bid 02:37:18
• A councilmember asked what consequences follow when projects exceed approved amounts without returning to council, citing one in her district 02:37:57
• The city auditor's office said there generally were not consequences in those cases, but they could be built into policy or legislation 02:41:24
• A councilmember asked how much remains in Measures U and KK, saying he wants to explore a possible new bond in 2028 for facilities 02:41:44
• City staff said parks funds in the bond are largely committed, while the citywide facilities category has more room 02:42:39
• City staff said for finance that most Measure KK money will likely be spent by 2028, with transportation and affordable housing funds likely fully used 02:44:19
• City staff said some approved projects lack full funding, sometimes on purpose while seeking matching grants 02:45:20
• A councilmember asked who is responsible for making sure audit recommendations are carried out, given staffing shortages 02:48:19
• City staff said as interim city administrator she is focused on having departments act on the auditor's follow-up reports 02:49:12
• The city auditor's office said his office tracks recommendations twice a year, with a new dashboard, and that more than 300 remain outstanding 02:49:45
• A councilmember asked the administration when it would report back to council with a timeline for the work 02:51:39

The consent calendar bundles more than thirty items into one vote: emergency declaration renewals, grants, contracts, a $600,000 settlement, $50 million in Measure U and other affordable housing allocations, positions on state Propositions 1 and 43, and confirmation of a second Planning Commission appointee. Item 6.21, a $75,000 grant for removing abandoned boats, was added late and first needed a two-thirds urgency vote. Police staff then proposed dropping its waiver of small and local business contracting requirements, and the council adopted it with that change. Items 6.5, 6.6 and 6.7 were continued to November 10. Carroll Fife (Councilmember, District 3; Chair, Life Enrichment Committee) voted no on 6.26, a concrete purchase that includes waivers of the city's border-wall and sanctuary-city contracting bans. 02:56:28

• Urgency finding for item 6.21 (SAVE grant), moved by Zac Unger (Councilmember, District 1; Chair, Public Works and Transportation Committee), seconded by Charlene Wang (Councilmember, District 2; Chair, Public Safety Committee). Result: passed, 7-0, 1 excused. 03:02:57
• Motion by Rowena Brown (Councilmember, At Large; Chair, Community and Economic Development Committee; Chair, Education Partnership Committee), seconded by Charlene Wang (Councilmember, District 2; Chair, Public Safety Committee), to adopt the consent calendar, continuing items 6.5, 6.6 and 6.7 and amending item 6.21 to remove the small and local business waiver; Carroll Fife (Councilmember, District 3; Chair, Life Enrichment Committee) voted no on item 6.26 only; Kevin Jenkins (Councilmember, District 6; President, City Council; Chair, Rules and Legislation Committee) and Noel Gallo (Councilmember, District 5; President Pro Tempore) were excused. Result: passed, 6-0, 2 excused. No: Carroll Fife (Councilmember, District 3; Chair, Life Enrichment Committee). 03:23:40

• Police department staff gave the urgency reasons for the vessel grant: the grant term began October 1, the governor declared a state of emergency, and boats cost more to remove once they sink 03:02:16
• Police department staff said removing vessels quickly matters because costs rise once they sink 03:02:16
• An official clarified as parliamentarian that the change removes the request to waive small and local business requirements, making it an amendment, not a title change 03:04:31
• Police department staff listed the struck language: the sixth whereas clause, part of the twelfth, and the fifth further resolved clause 03:20:49
• A councilmember spoke on the United Against Hate Week resolution, noting the movement was cofounded in Oakland in 2017 03:21:22
• A councilmember registered a no vote on item 6.26 over its waivers of the city's sanctuary city contracting policies 03:22:58

Members announced upcoming district events. At the end of the meeting, the second Planning Commission appointee, confirmed on consent, was invited to speak. He talked about his family's long history in Oakland and his family ties to the Black Panther Party. 03:23:55

• A councilmember announced a District 3 town hall on Saturday, October 24, on data centers and the coming moratorium, at Beth Eden Baptist Church at 10 a.m. 03:23:59
• A councilmember announced a District 3 town hall on illegal dumping at City Hall on Monday, October 26, with city staff giving first-quarter updates 03:23:59
• A councilmember highlighted a Heritage Month celebration in Fruitvale Village on Saturday and Halloween events in Montclair and the Laurel 03:24:54
• Ken Houston (Councilmember, District 7) thanked colleagues for a city event held in his district 03:25:32
• A Planning Commission appointee said as the new planning commissioner that the appointment is not about himself 03:35:59
• A Planning Commission appointee said his goal is to open opportunities for people who look like him and for the disenfranchised 03:37:10

• Police Commission slate (5.2): eight speakers. Four supported the former-mayor nominee, among them Chinatown community leaders citing her presence there and her public safety work, one with a translator. Two opposed her: one cited strained relations with police leadership when she was mayor, and one asked where she had been during past police oversight debates. One argued the selection panel had actually submitted the two nominees as separate slates. Several criticized the council's earlier handling of a prior commissioner's reappointment, and one accused Zac Unger (Councilmember, District 1; Chair, Public Works and Transportation Committee) of giving a false reason for opposing it.
• Hotel tax sharing hearing (4.1): the president of Oakland Roots and Soul and a Jack London improvement district representative described World Cup watch parties, murals and business activity. One speaker questioned why Oakland paid more than neighboring cities toward the club's facility. One speaker, during a later item, argued the Claremont Hotel is in Berkeley.
• Nuisance penalties (4.2): five speakers. Three, including neighbors, supported the higher cap, citing years of noise, truck traffic and unpermitted construction by a meat distribution business in the Golden Gate area. Two doubted it would work, one pointing to weak enforcement of earlier laws and one to a broad culture of disregard for rules.
• Planning Commission appointment (5.1): three speakers. One opposed it, citing the appointee's remarks at Rules on displacement and alleged political ties of a former law partner. One supported him. One criticized mayoral appointments in general.
• City audit (5.3): two speakers. One tied the audit's vacancy findings to stalled city worker contract talks and a possible strike. One stressed the lack of bond fund audits and called for a library in the Hoover-Durant area.
• Consent calendar: five speakers. One read from an appeal he said he is preparing over Measure A's ballot language. A PG&E representative promoted the Love Life Foundation's November 21 gala. One alleged a councilmember misuses an official social media account for campaigning and raised concerns about ICE. One opposed renewing the homelessness emergency and items 6.30 and 6.31 without audits of homeless service providers, and said 6.7 would penalize informal cleanups. One objected to waivers, items that bypassed committee, and the sanctuary-city waiver in 6.26.
• Open forum: about five speakers, on a planned appeal over Measure A's ballot language and Measure EE, a property owner's troubles with a nearby encampment, the Public Ethics Commission and campaign finance, a complaint about how city homelessness staff handled a disease warning at a Jack London encampment, and city hiring and police citizenship requirements under sanctuary policy.

• The Police Commission selection panel is to send the council a new slate. The panel says it has a reserve pool, and the city attorney's office said whether the withdrawn nominee can rescind his withdrawal and whether he is eligible were still unresolved at the meeting.
• The nuisance penalty ordinance (4.2) comes back for final passage on November 10 (agenda).
• Final passage of items 6.5, 6.6 and 6.7 was continued to November 10 because required notices weren't published.
• The San Leandro Creek Trail ordinance (6.28) and the Affordable Housing Trust Fund ordinance (6.31) come back for final passage on November 10 (agenda).
• The City Attorney's Office is to report back on whether civil penalties can automatically adjust for inflation.
• Ken Houston (Councilmember, District 7) asked to work with Zac Unger (Councilmember, District 1; Chair, Public Works and Transportation Committee) on a separate item to lock in hiring and training enforcement officers, who he said can gather evidence for the district attorney; the city attorney's office said it would have to come back separately.
• Public Works says the audit recommendations on on-call contract policy are targeted for January 2027, not November 2026. The administration is to follow up with Rowena Brown (Councilmember, At Large; Chair, Community and Economic Development Committee; Chair, Education Partnership Committee) on their status, and the auditor's semiannual follow-up reports continue.
• The auditor's team is to send the audit presentation to Janani Ramachandran (Councilmember, District 4; Chair, Finance and Management Committee).
• The Finance and Management Committee recommended extending the parking citation contract (6.22) only to June 30, 2027, with staff returning as soon as possible with other vendor options; the meeting didn't say whether the council adopted it in that form.
• Propositions 1 and 43, which the council took positions on, are on the November 3, 2026 ballot.
• District 3 town halls: data centers and the moratorium on Saturday, October 24, at 10 a.m. at Beth Eden Baptist Church, and illegal dumping on Monday, October 26, at City Hall.
• The Planning Commission appointee said the general plan update will come next spring.

The committee approved the draft minutes of its October 8, 2026 meeting. There were no public speakers. 00:02:40

• Rowena Brown (Councilmember, At Large; Chair, Community and Economic Development Committee; Chair, Education Partnership Committee) moved, seconded by Janani Ramachandran (Councilmember, District 4; Chair, Finance and Management Committee), to approve the draft minutes of October 8, 2026. Result: passed, 3-0, one excused. 00:03:52

The committee's routine review of the schedule of its outstanding items, known as the rules pending list. The administration reported no changes, and there were no public speakers. 00:03:52

• Janani Ramachandran (Councilmember, District 4; Chair, Finance and Management Committee) moved, seconded by Rowena Brown (Councilmember, At Large; Chair, Community and Economic Development Committee; Chair, Education Partnership Committee), to approve item two as is. Result: passed, 3-0, one excused. 00:04:19

This is a citizen-sponsored initiative petition called the 'Oakland Living Wage for All Act of 2026.' According to the agenda, it would amend Oakland's minimum wage ordinances to raise the minimum wage to $30 for Oakland employees by July 1, 2037, among other things. The legislation from the Office of the City Clerk has two parts. First is a resolution accepting the certification of the results of the examination of the initiative petition. Second, under California Elections Code section 9215, the council must then adopt one of three options: (A) adopt the initiative as an ordinance without alteration; (B) submit it to the voters at the next general municipal election, November 7, 2028, or at a special election held 88 to 103 days after the election is called; or (C) order a report under Elections Code section 9212 on the initiative's effects, to be presented to the council within 30 days. This committee did not decide the measure itself. It only scheduled the item for the December 1, 2026 City Council agenda as a non-consent item. Under Rule 24, election matters go straight to the council without a committee hearing. 00:04:19

▶ Hear it Wage measure backers ask the council to skip the ballot · 0:33

• Janani Ramachandran (Councilmember, District 4; Chair, Finance and Management Committee) moved, seconded by Rowena Brown (Councilmember, At Large; Chair, Community and Economic Development Committee; Chair, Education Partnership Committee), to approve item three as is, which scheduled items 3.1 and 3.2 as requested. Result: passed, 4-0. 00:11:39

• The city clerk explained that the Elections Code requires the council to pick one of the three options, which is why the item goes straight to the council 00:06:24

On October 6, 2026, the council approved a 45-day interim emergency moratorium, Ordinance No. 13899 C.M.S. (agenda). It pauses approval of land use entitlements and agreements for developing or operating data centers in Oakland. The item is sponsored by Carroll Fife (Councilmember, District 3; Chair, Life Enrichment Committee) and the Planning and Building Department and has two parts. First is a resolution adopting the written report that Government Code section 65858(d) requires within 35 days of the moratorium's passage. The report describes the measures taken to address the conditions that led to the moratorium, and the resolution makes CEQA findings. Second is an interim emergency ordinance extending the moratorium by ten months and fifteen days. The committee scheduled both for the November 10, 2026 special City Council agenda as a public hearing. It used Rule 24 to bypass committee review because state law deadlines require the hearing on that date. 00:06:24

• Janani Ramachandran (Councilmember, District 4; Chair, Finance and Management Committee) moved, seconded by Rowena Brown (Councilmember, At Large; Chair, Community and Economic Development Committee; Chair, Education Partnership Committee), to approve item three as is, which scheduled items 3.1 and 3.2 as requested. Result: passed, 4-0. 00:11:39

• The city clerk read the reason for skipping committee review: state law requires the council to hear a written report 35 days after the moratorium was adopted, and the report would let the council consider an extension 00:07:28
• The city clerk stated that to meet state deadlines, the item must be on the November 10 council agenda as a public hearing 00:08:34

The committee reviewed the draft agendas for the October 27, 2026 committee meetings and the October 29 Rules Committee, the committee pending lists, and the draft November 5 Rules Committee agenda. The clerk said the November 3 meeting is canceled for the election. Department of Transportation staff asked to move one Public Safety Committee item, and the committee approved the agendas with that change. 00:11:39

• Rowena Brown (Councilmember, At Large; Chair, Community and Economic Development Committee; Chair, Education Partnership Committee) moved, seconded by Janani Ramachandran (Councilmember, District 4; Chair, Finance and Management Committee), to approve item four as amended, moving Public Safety Committee item 3 from October 27 to November 17. Result: passed, 4-0. 00:13:49

• The city clerk noted that the draft November 5 Rules agenda is listed because November 3 is canceled for the election 00:11:39
• City staff asked that item 3 on the October 27 Public Safety Committee agenda be withdrawn and rescheduled for that committee's November 17 meeting 00:12:33
• City staff said the department had conferred with the Public Safety Committee chair, Charlene Wang (Councilmember, District 2; Chair, Public Safety Committee), who supported the request by email 00:12:33

• Two speakers commented on item 3. Both said they were with the group One Fair Wage, and both spoke in favor of the 'Living Wage for All' minimum wage measure. One thanked members for following the law on the measure the previous week. She described a colleague who couldn't attend because she earns less than $30 an hour and has to work every hour she can, and she urged members to meet with the coalition backing the measure. The other said the coalition includes small businesses and workers. He asked members to study the measure, base their decision on empirical data, and meet with all stakeholders, including opponents, and said the coalition would ask the council to decide on the ordinance itself so the measure can avoid the ballot.
• No speakers at open forum.

• December 1, 2026 City Council (non-consent): the 'Oakland Living Wage for All Act of 2026' initiative. The council will consider a resolution accepting the petition certification results and must choose one of three options: adopt the initiative unchanged, send it to the voters, or order a 9212 report on its effects within 30 days.
• November 10, 2026 special City Council meeting, as a public hearing: the state-required written report on the data center moratorium, and an emergency ordinance extending the moratorium by ten months and fifteen days.
• Public Safety Committee: item 3 from the October 27, 2026 agenda, a Department of Transportation item, was withdrawn and rescheduled to November 17.
• The next Rules and Legislation Committee meeting is October 29, 2026. A draft agenda for November 5 was also reviewed. The clerk said November 3 is canceled for the election.
• The One Fair Wage speakers said their coalition plans to meet with members before the council decides on the measure.